In contemporary society, detailed descriptions of crimes in the global media have become a subject of considerable debate. This essay will argue why the government should regulate the flow of information and impose restrictions on publications of details of a felony.
The most compelling reason to support this view is that comprehensive depiction of crime tends to have a negative impact on citizens. When the mass media overly covers crime, the outcome is invariably pessimistic for individuals’ psychical health. To illustrate, reading such news can create the wrong impression that the world is more dangerous than it really is. Consequently, it becomes clear that the mass nature of this information is harmful for consumers.
A further point worth considering is victims’ private lives. This is particularly evident in very grave offences when the mental state of victim is severely damaged. For instance, after beating a person goes to a psychologist to reabilitate for a long time, and just one photo or article about crime can break him down again. It is not only confidentiality, but also the huge bad consequences for victum.
Admettedly, those who oppose this view maintain that society has all rights to information for security. They argue that information like a criminal’s handwriting can protect them and their families. However, this argument fails to account for the fact that such precautions do not require datailed information of the crime. Moreover, media testimony often turns out to be invalid, which ultimately undermines the opposing standpoint.
In conclusion, while there are those who believe in the success of coverage of the crime details in newspapers and TV, the evidence strongly suggests that this decision will result in significant difficulties for the population. It is therefore recommended to keep details private.